A64001:215
Of the morality of the fourth commandment as still in force to bind Christians…Of the morality of the fourth commandement as still in force to binde Christians…
Of the morality of the fourth commandment as still in force to bind Christians delivered by way of answer to the translator of Doctor Prideaux his lecture, concerning the doctrine of the Sabbath ... / written by William Twice ...Of the morality of the fourth commandement as still in force to binde Christians delivered by way of answer to the translator of Doctor Prideaux his lecture, concerning the doctrine of the Sabbath ... / written by William Twisse ...
London: printed by E.G. for John Rothwell, 1641London: printed by E.G. for Iohn Rothwell, 1641
The Preface of the Translator to the Christian Reader. › Section 6 › Exam.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
it is only proper and seasonable in case the thing imposed be of a burdensome nature, like unto that Saint Peter speaks of, Acts 15. 10. saying, Now therefore, why tempt ye God to lay a yoke on the Disciples necks which neither our Fathers nor we were able to bear? Such indeed was the yoke of circumcision; which provoked Zippora (according to common opinion) driven to circumcise her son to save her husbands life, to throw the fore-skin at her husbands feet calling him a bloody husband for urging her thereunto. But what burden is it (save unto the flesh) to rejoice in the Lord, to sabbatize with him, to walk with him in holy meditation? Was it no ⟨p. 130⟩burden to the godly Jews to consecrate one day in seven to the exercises of Piety under the Law; and shall it be a burden to us in the time of the Gospel? Or can it be conceived to be a greater burden unto us to keep our Christian Sabbath on the Lords Day, then on any other day of the week? was there ever any day of the week marked out unto us with a more honourable or more wonderful work to draw us to rejoice in the Lord thereon, then the first day of the week whereon our Saviour rose, by his Resurrection to bring life and immortality to light? yet we confess we read of no Law nor Precept for this in the new Testament, but, we read that ever under the Gospel we must have a Sabbath to observe, Math. 24. 20. And we know, and Chemnitius knew full well, that it belongs to the Lord of the Sabbath to change it, and consequently to ordain it, and that it was changed, and the Lords Day observed generally in the Apostles days, none that I know makes question of; and how could this be, but by the Apostles ordinance; and is it likely they would take upon them this authority without a calling? And why should that day of the week (and not that day of the year) be called the Lords Day, if not for the same use under the Gospel that the Lords Day, was of under the Law, especially that day under the Law (which was the Jews Sabbath) being now abrogated? and lastly we find it manifestly spoken of the day of Christs Resurrection, Psal. 118. 24. This is the day that the Lord hath made, let us rejoice and be glad in it:
it is onely proper and seasonable in case the thing imposed be of a burthensome nature, like unto that Saint Peter speakes of,